Bombay High Court

BHAVESH LAKHICHAND SALUNKHEversusTHE TAHSILDAR AND ANOTHER

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: S G CHAPALGAONKAR

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed as the petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing an appeal, and interim relief is contingent upon filing the appeal and depositing 50% of the penalty.

Summary

Petitioner Bhavesh Lakhichand Salunkhe challenged a notice/order dated 17‑12‑2025 issued by the S.D.O. Faijpur under section 48 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. The High Court observed that the petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing an appeal before the appropriate appellate authority, and therefore the writ petition should not be entertained. The petitioner’s counsel offered to file the appeal, seek a stay on the vehicle release, and deposit 50% of the penalty imposed. The Court directed that if the appeal is filed and a stay application is made, the authority may consider interim relief provided the petitioner deposits the assured 50% of the penalty. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed with these observations.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition is maintainable when an alternative remedy of appeal is available under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code.
Whether the High Court can dismiss the writ petition on the ground of the existence of an alternative remedy.
Whether the deposit of 50% of the penalty is a condition for granting interim relief pending the appeal.

Legislation cited

Maharashtra Land Revenue Code — s. 48

Subjects

writ petition
alternative remedy
Section 48
Maharashtra Land Revenue Code
interim relief
stay
appeal
penalty deposit

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:503


                                                 1                       wp 217.26.odt

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                  940 WRIT PETITION NO. 217 OF 2026

                                  Bhavesh Lakhichand Salunkhe
                                              VERSUS
                                    The Tahsildar And Another
                                                  ...
                          Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. N.D. Sonavane
                             AGP for Respondent : Mr. S.A. Gaikwad
                                                  ...
                                           CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
                                           Dated : January 08, 2026

                   PER COURT :-

                   1.    The petitioner seeks to challenge the notice/order dated

                   17.12.2025 passed by the S.D.O. Faijpur Division, Faijpur,

                   District Jalgaon under section 48 of the Maharashtra Land

                   Revenue Code.


                   2.    Apparently, petitioner has an alternate remedy of filing

                   the appeal.      Therefore, present writ petition need not be

                   entertained.


                   3.    At this stage, Mr. Sonvane, learned advocate appearing

                   for the petitioner submits that, petitioner would file an appeal

                   before the appellate authority alongwith an application for

                   stay/release of the vehicle and also offers to deposit 50% of the

                   amount of penalty as imposed under the impugned order.
                               2                       wp 217.26.odt

4.      In case the appeal is filed and an application for stay is

made, the concerned Authority shall consider for grant of

interim relief,    in case the applicant deposits 50% of the

amount as assured to this           Court.   Writ petition stands

dismissed with the aforesaid observations.


                                    ( S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. )
                              ...

AAA/-

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…